Should Janet Napolitino step down ?

h.g.Whiz said:
U.S. Congressman Michael C. Burgess thinks Janet Napolitino should step down. Do you ?
http://burgess.house.gov/
Click to expand...

No. Burgess should get the hell out of congress. He's an idiot. He can't read. Or maybe he just can't see that the rpeort refers to dirtbags like McVeigh or John Trochmann. We do not need morons like Burgess making decisions thjat effect the future of America.

Hey, Burgess. Your side LOST.
 
Last edited:
leftysergeant said:
No. Burgess should get the hell out of congress. He's an idiot. He can't read. Or maybe he just can't see that the rpeort refers to dirtbags like McVeigh or John Trochmann. We do not need morons like Burgess making decisions thjat effect the future of America.

Hey, Burgess. Your side LOST.
Click to expand...

Are you a veteran?
 
He (and everyone else making a big deal out of this) is either stupid or pretending to misunderstand in order to make political hay.

Right wing extremist groups try to recruit veterans. This is the truth. If you have a problem with it, you need to complain to reality, not to Janet Napolitano. And if you think that that's a slam against veterans, you need to complain to whoever was supposed to teach you how to read, not Janet Napolitano. It takes time for government agencies to change; other than the top-level officials, an agency three months into a new administration is almost identical to that agency in the previous administration. So if you have a problem with the report in general or the bureaucrats who wrote it, you need to complain to Michael Chertoff, not Janet Napolitano. And if you're disappointed that it's been several years since the last Concrete Blonde album, you need to... wait... never mind.
 
Janet's okay in my book. I thought the memo was a little on the silly side that DHS wrote, but not so far off base that she needs to be canned.

Napolitano, by the way.
 
Jimbo07 said:
If nothing else, I don't really care for what she has to say about Canada

About our border

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Just to follow up that, as a Canadian I usually don't have any opinion on who the U.S. appoints to what cabinet or governmental positions. But given the nonsense initially spouted by Napolitano about some of the 9/11 hijackers entering the U.S. from Canada (a myth which still rears its head from time to time amongst some members of the U.S. government for inexplicable reasons), I think CBC commentator Rex Murphy hits the nail right on the head, particularly the last paragraph:

It’s nearly 9 years since the crash of the twin towers, and Janet Napolitano still doesn’t know – still – that all of the hijackers that brought tragedy that day came into the U.S.A. through their own Customs and Immigration. Not one came down through the great forests of Toronto or over the tundra of Montreal, not one of them got access to the U.S. via what Ms Napolitano thinks of as “borderless” Canada.

Must it be said to Ms Napolitano yet again? The September 11 hijackers did not enter via Canada. Sauda Arabia is not the 11th province. Mohammed Atta did not fly into New York that terrible day from Prince Edward Island. The 9-11 hijackers did not go to “flight school” in Buttonville. Canada was not, in whole or in part, the “holding room” of the 9-11 terrorists.

What is Barack Obama doing appointing someone to head Homeland Security, who, eight years after the attacks, does not even now know where the hijackers came from and how they got into their country? Here, it’s not her ignorance about Canada which should be troubling. It’s her ignorance of the most publicized event in modern American history. How can anyone be head of Homeland Security and not know the history of the 19 men who killed nearly 3,000 Americans?
Click to expand...


The entire commentary can be read here.
 
Jimbo07 said:
If nothing else, I don't really care for what she has to say about Canada

About our border

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

As she is known by those who suffered under her the most as "Janet come Lately", its no surprise that she'd love to shift blame to a border that she didnt blow open in violation of law and order and decency and common sense.

Now we all know we can point to more than one canadian post on here attacking her detractors in years past. Now you get to see why we dislike her so much
 
linusrichard said:
He (and everyone else making a big deal out of this) is either stupid or pretending to misunderstand in order to make political hay.

Right wing extremist groups try to recruit veterans. This is the truth. If you have a problem with it, you need to complain to reality, not to Janet Napolitano. And if you think that that's a slam against veterans, you need to complain to whoever was supposed to teach you how to read, not Janet Napolitano. It takes time for government agencies to change; other than the top-level officials, an agency three months into a new administration is almost identical to that agency in the previous administration. So if you have a problem with the report in general or the bureaucrats who wrote it, you need to complain to Michael Chertoff, not Janet Napolitano. And if you're disappointed that it's been several years since the last Concrete Blonde album, you need to... wait... never mind.
Click to expand...
I believe you are correct--the report was likely drafted under the Bush Administration. However, it is being approved by the current Administration.
I don't have a problem with what YOU are saying--however, the report READS like Veterans are more succeptable to succumbing to the anti-government/right (or Left) wing extremist position.
And no correction made.
My personal feeling is that anyone nominated/appointed to that particular position should step down immediately.
 
rwguinn said:
I believe you are correct--the report was likely drafted under the Bush Administration. However, it is being approved by the current Administration.
I don't have a problem with what YOU are saying--however, the report READS like Veterans are more succeptable to succumbing to the anti-government/right (or Left) wing extremist position.
And no correction made.
My personal feeling is that anyone nominated/appointed to that particular position should step down immediately.
Click to expand...

Let's see how it reads:
(U) Disgruntled Military Veterans
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today. —

(U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing extremist groups. —

(U) A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.” —

(U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have joined extremist groups.
Click to expand...

Anything here untrue? Anything here irrelevant to law enforcement? If it's all true, and it all has at least the potential to be useful information for law enforcement, then why "correct" it? Because it hurt somebody's feewings? Is this just another example of the supposedly anti-PC Republicans going to PC extremes?

These people have a job to do. If somebody's precious sensibilities are offended because someone dares to point out the relevant fact that white power groups are recruiting from ex-military, and sending their members into the military for training, I don't see why that should be cause for the DHS to shirk their duties.

Janet Napolitano shouldn't apologize or step down, and neither should her staff. She should clarify this report for those who are confused (and I believe she has attempted to do so). If Rep. Burgess continues to be offended that the DHS is going to do its job, perhaps the DHS should make room in its budget for some of these.


To clarify, and maybe repeat myself a little bit - the people who have a problem with this report are actually saying that the DHS should use political considerations in writing its reports. The right is acting like a stereotype of the left; they should be embarrassed.
 
linusrichard said:
Let's see how it reads:


Anything here untrue? Anything here irrelevant to law enforcement? If it's all true, and it all has at least the potential to be useful information for law enforcement, then why "correct" it? Because it hurt somebody's feewings? Is this just another example of the supposedly anti-PC Republicans going to PC extremes?

These people have a job to do. If somebody's precious sensibilities are offended because someone dares to point out the relevant fact that white power groups are recruiting from ex-military, and sending their members into the military for training, I don't see why that should be cause for the DHS to shirk their duties.

Janet Napolitano shouldn't apologize or step down, and neither should her staff. She should clarify this report for those who are confused (and I believe she has attempted to do so). If Rep. Burgess continues to be offended that the DHS is going to do its job, perhaps the DHS should make room in its budget for some of these.


To clarify, and maybe repeat myself a little bit - the people who have a problem with this report are actually saying that the DHS should use political considerations in writing its reports. The right is acting like a stereotype of the left; they should be embarrassed.
Click to expand...
Condecending, Holier-than-thou, Daddy-knows-best attitude noted.
I made an effort to show why people object to it, (and her defense only entrenced people)--and I get back 'Did it hurt yur itty-bitty feewings' ********.
 
Why Obama appointed a person to DHSS who was derelict about boarder security in her own state is baffling. In 2008, Napolitano signed an executive order stripping Maricopa County Sheriffs Department of $1.6 million for illegal immigration enforcement.

When confronted with her 9/11 gaffe she replied:

"I can't talk to that. I can talk about the future. And here's the future. The future is we have borders."

Joe Biden move over. There's a new gaffer in town.
 
rwguinn said:
Condecending, Holier-than-thou, Daddy-knows-best attitude noted.
Click to expand...
If by "condescending, holier-than-thou" you mean that I don't think it makes sense for the DHS to edit its memos to avoid offending people, and if by "Daddy" you mean the DHS, and if by "knows best" you mean knows best how to do its job without having to worry about offending people, then yes, I guess I have a "condescending, holier-than-thou, Daddy-knows-best attitude." Whatever.

I made an effort to show why people object to it, (and her defense only entrenced people)--and I get back 'Did it hurt yur itty-bitty feewings' ********.
Click to expand...

I wasn't saying it hurt your itty-bitty feewings. You don't appear, as far as I can tell, to be among the people who were butthurt by the true statements in the report. (Which makes me confused as to why you think Napolitano should step down, but that's a tangent.) I was talking about the itty-bitty feewings of the people who were butthurt by the true statements in the report. I wasn't trying to condescend to you - I was trying to condescend to them. Because there's a time when condescension is appropriate, and that time is when people are acting like whiny babies for no good reason, and getting in the way of grown-ups who have a job to do. I don't mean you.


ETA: I don't disagree much with what you were saying about why people object to it. I just disagree with the people who object to it.
 
Last edited:
h.g.Whiz said:
Are you a veteran?
Click to expand...
He is, I am too and I have no problem recognizing some fellow veterans from my time in that document. Not many at all, but certainly enough to leave me no doubt of it's veracity. And the reports of racist white power members was not at all a well kept secret for a number of recent years - I suspect non-white power groups had infiltrators also. It happens. Doesn't tarnish the vets who aren't those things.
 
Cicero said:
Why Obama appointed a person to DHSS who was derelict about boarder security in her own state is baffling. In 2008, Napolitano signed an executive order stripping Maricopa County Sheriffs Department of $1.6 million for illegal immigration enforcement.
Click to expand...

Could it be that that was because that merry madman Sheriff Joe was putting it to frivilous uses?

Joe Biden move over. There's a new gaffer in town.
Click to expand...

Yeah. His name is Burgess and he can't read.
 
leftysergeant said:
Could it be that that was because that merry madman Sheriff Joe was putting it to frivilous uses?



Yeah. His name is Burgess and he can't read.
Click to expand...

Arpaio is accused of many things, but nobody has ever accused him of not using his resources to stem the tide of illegal immigration.

If Chertoff had said the 9/11 terrorists came across the Canadian boarder you would be singing a different tune.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom